piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) (12/16/89)
In article <14650@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>, kwon@sybil (Thomas Kwon) writes:
`
`I was wondering if anyone is interested in creating a newsgroup called
`"TeX.questions" or something along that line.
`
I had been contemplating the creation of a newsgroup comp.text.TeX for some
days when Thomas' message appeared. As I haven't seen an official call for
discussion yet, I think it is time to issue one. Otherwise we will get a
loose discussion that brings us nowhere.
I propose the newsgroup to be unmoderated.
The newsgroup is for TeX and LaTeX related postings. These are now mainly
found in comp.text, with some Postscript related postings in
comp.lang.postscript. About half (or a little bit more) of comp.text is
devoted to TeX and LaTeX, and I rather would not be bothered by nroff/troff
or even WP. This motivates the place in the hierarchy.
Now about the name: An other alternative would be comp.text.tex. I have a
number of reasons to propose comp.text.TeX.
1. It hono(u)rs Knuth in that this is HiS preferred spelling.
2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name?
3. While pressing the shift key you have an additional 2 seconds to think
about your posting.
NOTE: Please let us not have another aquarium disaster!
I think it would be advisable if the TeXhax Digest would be
bi-directionally gatewayed. It is now gatewayed *into* comp.text, but for
the benefit of those poor people without Usenet access, the other way would
also be preferable. So I will also send this message to TeXhax. Of course
gatawaying is up to the moderators. They can also make a reasonable
selection for inclusion.
The discussion period will end on Thursday, Jan 11, 1990. This might seem
too long for such a simple issue, but think of the holiday season. If the
name issue is not settled in three weeks I will send out a POLL FOR NAME.
--
Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University,
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Telephone: +31-30-531806 Uucp: uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!ruuinf!piet
Telefax: +31-30-513791 Internet: piet@cs.ruu.nl (*`Pete')ms361@leah.Albany.Edu (Mark Steinberger) (12/18/89)
In article <2173@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl>, piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: > I had been contemplating the creation of a newsgroup comp.text.TeX for some > days when Thomas' message appeared. As I haven't seen an official call for > discussion yet, I think it is time to issue one. You missed the obvious name for the newsgroup: comp.tex If you insist, make it comp.TeX, but the intervening "text" is unnecessary. I would support creation of this group. --Mark
tale@cs.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) (12/18/89)
In <2317@leah.Albany.Edu> ms361@leah.Albany.Edu (Mark Steinberger) writes: > You missed the obvious name for the newsgroup: > comp.tex > If you insist, make it comp.TeX, but the intervening "text" is unnecessary. The comp.text hierarchy already exists and tex fits in it nicely. There is no namespace need for a second-level TeX group. Five characters is not a suitable reason. If the group is to be created it should be as comp.text.tex. Capitalisation is not suggested because of the problems various extant news software has with case-sensitivity. Dave -- (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))
jacob@blackbox.gore.COM (Jacob Gore) (12/18/89)
/ news.announce.newgroups / piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) / Dec 16, 1989 / The group sounds OK, though there's hardly enough traffic in comp.text to require a split. > Now about the name: No way. Keep it lower case. > 1. It hono(u)rs Knuth in that this is HiS preferred spelling. Not good enough. Same argument could be used for most current groups (Comp.Sys.NeXT?). > 2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its > name? No. > 3. While pressing the shift key you have an additional 2 seconds to think > about your posting. Man, what software do YOU use to post??? (Yeah, I know, it was a joke...) Jacob -- Jacob Gore Jacob@Gore.Com boulder!gore!jacob
gaynor@busboys.rutgers.edu (Silver) (12/18/89)
piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: > Now about the name: An other alternative would be comp.text.tex. I have a > number of reasons to propose comp.text.TeX. > 1. It hono(u)rs Knuth in that this is HiS preferred spelling. > 2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name? > 3. While pressing the shift key you have an additional 2 seconds to think > about your posting. > NOTE: Please let us not have another aquarium disaster! This would be a mistake. This would be a mistake. This would be a mistake. Regards, [Ag] gaynor@topaz.rutgers.edu
piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) (12/18/89)
In article <2173@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl>, piet@cs (Piet van Oostrum) writes:
`
`Now about the name: An other alternative would be comp.text.tex. I have a
`number of reasons to propose comp.text.TeX.
`1. It hono(u)rs Knuth in that this is HiS preferred spelling.
`2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name?
`3. While pressing the shift key you have an additional 2 seconds to think
` about your posting.
A number of people have replied that some news software can't cope with
upper case letters in newsgroup names. Sorry about that. Although I think
that that kind of software is broken, I retract the uppercase proposal and
make it comp.text.tex.
--
Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University,
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Telephone: +31-30-531806 Uucp: uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!ruuinf!piet
Telefax: +31-30-513791 Internet: piet@cs.ruu.nl (*`Pete')peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (12/18/89)
> 2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name?
Wouldn't it be lovely to have the second newsgroup widely aliased to something
else?
--
`-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>.
'U` Also <peter@ficc.lonestar.org> or <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>.
"It was just dumb luck that Unix managed to break through the Stupidity Barrier
and become popular in spite of its inherent elegance." -- gavin@krypton.sgi.comspace@ncc1701.UUCP (Lars Soltau) (12/19/89)
In article <2317@leah.Albany.Edu> ms361@leah.Albany.Edu (Mark Steinberger) writes: >In article <2173@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl>, piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: >> I had been contemplating the creation of a newsgroup comp.text.TeX for some >> days when Thomas' message appeared. As I haven't seen an official call for >> discussion yet, I think it is time to issue one. > >You missed the obvious name for the newsgroup: > > comp.tex > >If you insist, make it comp.TeX, but the intervening "text" is unnecessary. > >I would support creation of this group. > >--Mark This group is absolutely necessary. But as for the name, I believe it should be comp.text.TeX, because a) it has to do with text processing. It obviously isn't on the same level as for example comp.sys or comp.sources, is it? b) as Piet said, TeX would not be TeX if it was tex. It's tau epsilon chi, for all of you who don't know TeX (then again, you wouldn't be reading this article if you didn't know TeX, would you?), so tex just doesn't feel right. Just because MS-DOS supports only capitals doesn't mean we have to use only lowercase, right? :-) -- Lars Soltau bang: ...uunet!unido!nadia!ncc1701!space BIX: --no bucks-- smart: ncc1701!space@nadia.UUCP
bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) (12/19/89)
In article <3601@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> dhosek@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (D.A. Hosek) writes:
Also, be aware that only a tiny fraction of the TeX community ever
even sees news. A large number of DVI driver questions, for
example, have gone unanswered because I didn't start reading news
until fairly recently. Leslie Lamport, who wrote LaTeX, reads
TeXhax. He does not get news. The same can be said of many other
important TeX people.
The Call For Discussion suggests that comp.text.tex be bidirectionally
gatewayed with TeXhax. This is A Good Thing, provided of course the
TeXhax digest moderator wishes it to be gatewayed and is willing to
cooperate. Workable mechanisms exist for linking single-article
newsgroups with digestified mailing lists (vis comp.sys.sun/Sun-Spots).
This would prevent the fragmentation of the TeX community, at the
expense of more work on the part of the moderator to filter out the
typical newsgroup noise. However, it would reqire that the newsgroup
be moderated, unlike the proposal in the Call For Discussion.
I think a moderated comp.text.tex gatewayed with TeXhax is a good
idea, provided that the current members of TeXhax want it that way.
If TeXhax doesn't want to be gatewayed onto the Usenet, then
comp.text.tex should not be created because it would fragment the
community, which would be A Bad Thing.markc@wpi.wpi.edu (Mark B. Cohen) (12/20/89)
In article <2173@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: ` `In article <14650@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>, kwon@sybil (Thomas Kwon) writes: ` ` ` `I was wondering if anyone is interested in creating a newsgroup called ` `"TeX.questions" or something along that line. ` ` `I had been contemplating the creation of a newsgroup comp.text.TeX for some `days when Thomas' message appeared. As I haven't seen an official call for `discussion yet, I think it is time to issue one. Otherwise we will get a `loose discussion that brings us nowhere. I agree. There is sufficient traffic in comp.text to sustain a spilt. Granted, the volume does not require one, but I have seen too many groups become unreadable because of an overly high volume. My personal favorite example is comp.sys.ibm.pc.... but that's a whole new topic. `I propose the newsgroup to be unmoderated. ` `The newsgroup is for TeX and LaTeX related postings. These are now mainly `found in comp.text, with some Postscript related postings in `comp.lang.postscript. About half (or a little bit more) of comp.text is `devoted to TeX and LaTeX, and I rather would not be bothered by nroff/troff `or even WP. This motivates the place in the hierarchy. There are so many different flavors of TeX: LaTeX, BibTeX, MuTeX, etc.... An open forum for any and all of them would be most welcome. `Now about the name: An other alternative would be comp.text.tex. I have a `number of reasons to propose comp.text.TeX. `1. It hono(u)rs Knuth in that this is HiS preferred spelling. `2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name? `3. While pressing the shift key you have an additional 2 seconds to think ` about your posting. I have no direct personal preference as to the _spelling_ of a group name. I do have, however, two questions. First, a minor issue. Are there any flavors of news software that would object to uppercase letters in a news group name? [Although I haven a personal SysV site, (doesn't everyone now? :) I don't know anything about usenet administration.] Second, a heirarchy issue. There exists the group comp.lang.postscript. Is it not true that TeX is as much of a language as PostScript? (Religious flames followup to alt.religion.computers) Even if a group for TeX discussion is to be a split off of comp.text, IMHO, the group should be named comp.lang.(tex||TeX). `NOTE: Please let us not have another aquarium disaster! What's wrong with sci.TeX? The perfect group for discussing Knuth's _TeX for Scientific Documentation_. `I think it would be advisable if the TeXhax Digest would be `bi-directionally gatewayed. It is now gatewayed *into* comp.text, but for `the benefit of those poor people without Usenet access, the other way would `also be preferable. So I will also send this message to TeXhax. Of course `gatawaying is up to the moderators. They can also make a reasonable `selection for inclusion. I agree with gatewaying the Digest. What about the LaTeX volunteer group at Stanford? Should there be a similar gateway from them? Or how about a condensation of "LaTeX-help@Stanford's Commonly Asked Questions"? `Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, P.S. In case you weren't sure, regarding sci.TeX: :-) :-) Mark Cohen, Dept of Computer Science, Worcester Polytechic Institute markc@wpi.wpi.edu markc@wpi.bitnet ...!well_connected_site!wpi.wpi.edu!markc (not UUCP domain registered) Note: Site is changing machine rooms at end of December. Mail may be delayed.
piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) (12/21/89)
In article <BOB.89Dec18170946@volitans.MorningStar.Com>, bob@MorningStar (Bob Sutterfield) writes:
`
`The Call For Discussion suggests that comp.text.tex be bidirectionally
`gatewayed with TeXhax. This is A Good Thing, provided of course the
`TeXhax digest moderator wishes it to be gatewayed and is willing to
`cooperate. Workable mechanisms exist for linking single-article
`newsgroups with digestified mailing lists (vis comp.sys.sun/Sun-Spots).
`
`This would prevent the fragmentation of the TeX community, at the
`expense of more work on the part of the moderator to filter out the
`typical newsgroup noise. However, it would reqire that the newsgroup
`be moderated, unlike the proposal in the Call For Discussion.
This is not necessary, only the gateway from usenet to TeXhax needs to be
moderated. I can imagine a moderator that filters out the messages from
comp.text.tex that should go into TeXhax. This doesn't have to be the same
as the TeXhax moderator, thereby sharing the workload. It could even be
done by a couple of people (e.g. distributed by the message number modulo n,
where n = the number of moderators).
--
Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University,
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Telephone: +31-30-531806 Uucp: uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!ruuinf!piet
Telefax: +31-30-513791 Internet: piet@cs.ruu.nl (*`Pete')bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) (12/21/89)
In article <2238@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: In article <BOB.89Dec18170946@volitans.MorningStar.Com>, bob@MorningStar (Bob Sutterfield) writes: comp.text.tex... bidirectionally gatewayed with TeXhax... would prevent the fragmentation of the TeX community... [but] would reqire that the newsgroup be moderated... This is not necessary, only the gateway from usenet to TeXhax needs to be moderated. I can imagine a moderator that filters out the messages from comp.text.tex that should go into TeXhax... You're suggesting a scheme that would establish comp.text.tex as a stream of input to TeXhax. The TeXhax moderator would filter that stream, along with the other already-established input streams (there's a mail address, and there's probably a TEX-L on the Bitnet, possibly a TeX echo on Fidonet, etc.), and compile the results into a single digest publication for distribution. Presumably, that digest would be posted to comp.text.tex, either as a digest (like comp.risks) or as a series of individual messages (like comp.sys.sun). (a) Messages would appear on the newsgroup, then pass through the filter and moderator and digestifier, then (in one form or another) back out onto the group again. Alternatively, (b) the TeXhax digest could be not carried on the newsgroup, but that would deprive the group of the messages that originated on TEX-L or the mailing list address. Yet alternatively again, (c) the moderator and digestifier could make a special Usenet edition of the TeXhax digest containing articles from all the other input streams besides comp.text.tex. This differentiation of the output stream would require considerable work on the part of the moderator and filter and confusion for those accessing the archives. I'm suggesting a scheme that would let the list and the group carry identical messages. Once each. From whatever source. Using currently-available list and news and gateway and digesting technology and adding fairly little to the moderator's coordination load, besides the volume increase inherent in opening oneself up to the Usenet. This doesn't have to be the same as the TeXhax moderator, thereby sharing the workload. It could even be done by a couple of people (e.g. distributed by the message number modulo n, where n = the number of moderators). Various schemes could be worked out, this might be a good one. Oh by the way, has anybody asked the TeXHax moderator what {s}he thinks of all this?
lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) (12/21/89)
In article <2173@ruuinf.cs.ruu.nl> piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) writes: >Now about the name: An other alternative would be comp.text.tex. I have a >number of reasons to propose comp.text.TeX. >2. Isn't it nice to have the first newsgroup with capital letters in its name? No, It'S nOt. MiXeD cAsE gRoUp NaMeS wIlL bReAk NeWs ImPlEmEnTaTiOnS rUnNiNg UnDeR cErTaIn BrAiNdAmAgEd OpErAtInG sYsTeMs. BeSiDeS, iT lOoKs StUpId. -- Lyndon Nerenberg VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca University {alberta,decwrl,lsuc}!atha!lyndon || lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA The Connector is the Notwork.
fac2@dayton.saic.com (Earle Ake) (12/22/89)
In article <1342@atha.AthabascaU.CA>, lyndon@cs.AthabascaU.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes: > > BeSiDeS, iT lOoKs StUpId. Maybe it looks stupid, but the utility really is spelled TeX! I do agree thought that we should make it all lowercase to be compatable with brain damaged news readers. I am all for it. -- _____________________________________________________________________________ ____ ____ ___ Earle Ake /___ /___/ / / Science Applications International Corporation ____// / / /__ Dayton, Ohio ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: fac2%dayton.saic.com@uunet.uu.net uucp: uunet!dayvb!fac2
wfp@well.UUCP (William F. Phillips) (12/23/89)
Good idea.
tale@cs.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) (12/28/89)
In article <6372@wpi.wpi.edu> markc@wpi.wpi.edu (Mark B. Cohen) writes: > First, a minor issue. > Are there any flavors of news software that would object to > uppercase letters in a news group name? As was pointed out right from the very beginning of this discussion, yes. Or "sort of", depending on what you mean by having software object to something. It might not stand up and say, "I find the silly look of this name to be offensive!" but it won't work anyway. > Second, a heirarchy issue. > There exists the group comp.lang.postscript. Is it not true that > TeX is as much of a language as PostScript? > (Religious flames followup to alt.religion.computers) > Even if a group for TeX discussion is to be a split off of > comp.text, IMHO, the group should be named comp.lang.(tex||TeX). Er, this isn't exactly a religious issue. I am still in the novice stages of both PostScript and TeX but it does not seem that TeX is quite the language that PostScript is. Applications can be written in PostScript, but all I've seen TeX used for is text (including signs, symbols and other aspects of general typography) processing. The general usefulness (or lack thereof if you hate Forth -- _that_ is a religious issue :-) of PostScript as a programming language in addition to a text/graphics formatter made it a quite logical candidate in the comp.lang hierarchy. Granted, I am not wizardly enough to know if all of the same things can be accomplished with TeX; if they can than perhaps comp.lang really is the best place for it. With my view of the world now, though, comp.text.tex seems to be the best name. Dave -- (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))
ralph (Ralph P. Sobek) (01/05/90)
I'm all for such a newsgroup, and also that it be bidirectionally
gatewayed with the TeXhax Digest. The only qualm I have is with the
name. In my opinion, the questions which concern TeX/LaTeX are of the
sort:
1) How do I do the following in {La}TeX?, or
2) How come the following piece of {La}TeX does not do what I
expect it to do?
In both of these cases, the problems are language issues concerning
TeX/LaTeX. Therefore, I suggest that the name of the group be
comp.lang.TeX (if USENET accepts uppercase letters) or comp.lang.tex
(if not). As precedent, we already have comp.lang.postscript. I
believe that the comp.text hierarchy should concern types of text
processing, e.g., desktop.
Ralph P. Sobek Disclaimer: The above ruminations are my own.
ralph@laas.fr Addresses are ordered by importance.
ralph@laas.uucp, or ...!uunet!mcvax!laas!ralph If all else fails, try:
SOBEK@FRMOP11.BITNET sobek@eclair.Berkeley.EDU
===============================================================================
Reliable software should kill people reliably! -Andy Mickel, Pascal News #13,78beck@hermod.cs.cornell.edu (Micah Beck) (01/06/90)
In article <768@laas.laas.fr> ralph@laas.fr writes: > >I'm all for such a newsgroup, and also that it be bidirectionally >gatewayed with the TeXhax Digest. The only qualm I have is with the >name. In my opinion, the questions which concern TeX/LaTeX are of the >sort: >1) How do I do the following in {La}TeX?, or >2) How come the following piece of {La}TeX does not do what I > expect it to do? > >In both of these cases, the problems are language issues concerning >TeX/LaTeX. Therefore, I suggest that the name of the group be >comp.lang.TeX (if USENET accepts uppercase letters) or comp.lang.tex >(if not). As precedent, we already have comp.lang.postscript. I >believe that the comp.text hierarchy should concern types of text >processing, e.g., desktop. I disagree. While La/TeX is a language, as is postscript, it is used primarily as a text processing tool, and there are a lot of questions which relate to *using* La/TeX and the other tools and programs which surround it (BibTeX, VorTeX, TransFig, ...) which would belong in comp.text.tex but not really in comp.lang.tex. The analogy with PostScript does not hold up. Most people who use PostScript are using it as in intermediate language for describing documents. It is not in itself a useful text processing tool. It is also self-contained, which is one of it's main strengths. Someone, like myself and I think most users, who view La/TeX as a document description language and never uses fancy extensibility features would expect to find the group under comp.text. A final point which I cannot resist: TeXnically speaking, LaTeX is a different language from plain TeX. They are built on the same macro engine (TeX), but are not compatible. Perhaps we need a comp.lang.tex newsgroup heirarchy: comp.lang.tex.{plain, latex, slitex, mtex, ytex...} Just kidding. Perhaps we can lay this issue to rest along with the upper/lower case name. /micah
ken@cs.rochester.edu (Ken Yap) (01/06/90)
|gatewayed with the TeXhax Digest. The only qualm I have is with the |name. In my opinion, the questions which concern TeX/LaTeX are of the |sort: |1) How do I do the following in {La}TeX?, or |2) How come the following piece of {La}TeX does not do what I | expect it to do? | |In both of these cases, the problems are language issues concerning |TeX/LaTeX. Therefore, I suggest that the name of the group be |comp.lang.TeX (if USENET accepts uppercase letters) or comp.lang.tex |(if not). As precedent, we already have comp.lang.postscript. I |believe that the comp.text hierarchy should concern types of text |processing, e.g., desktop. This point of view has some merit but I believe most people post as users (myself included) or system maintainers rather than as TeX programmers. A small fraction of readers hack macros. Note that many requests go "has somebody done a style file for this?" So while technically (sorry, pun unintended) TeX is a programming language, I think most of us see it as a text processing system. We'll just have to accept this a taxonomy overlap. Gnuemacs is also programable but nobody suggests comp.lang.gnuemacs. I might change my mind if somebody proposes an ANSI standard for TeX. :-) :-( (I hope not.)
xanthian@saturn.ADS.COM (Metafont Consultant Account) (01/09/90)
I've been reading comp.text for just a few weeks, but I really cannot see the need for this subgroup. The group traffic is fairly low, and surely easy enough for an interested reader to peruse. Moreover, about 85% (a guess) of the articles concern the TeX family, with only a minority being nroff, troff, or postscript articles. This doesn't seem to be the situation where a new newsgroup is in order. Am I missing something? -- Again, my opinions, not the account furnishers'. xanthian@well.sf.ca.us xanthian@ads.com (Kent Paul Dolan) Kent, the (bionic) man from xanth, now available as a build-a-xanthian kit at better toy stores near you. Warning - some parts are fragile. /^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\ < Your artwork converted to a METAFONT symbol program for TeX and LaTeX use! > < Send a salad plate sized blowup, a SASE, and a cover letter to me at TCC, > < P.O. Box 390755, Mountain View, CA 94039-0755 for a no risk, fixed price > < quote. Company logos a specialty. (Hey, it's a living, however modest.) > \vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv/